Secret communists. lol it's all come out in the open by now. You can just google it all. Why don't you just google Chesa Boudin and Bill Ayers and
Bernadine Dohrn. Made up posting? The only thing suspect here is your registration on ATS 11/7/2012

So where is the communism?

If I called you a vampire, but you don't drink blood or live in a castle, does that make you a vampire?

You are proving Maddow's points exactly. You and the GOP hope that you can repeat unsavory things enough
to make everyone believe you, well, it doesn't work. This election was proof of it, thankfully.

If I called you a vampire, but you don't drink blood or live in a castle, does that make you a vampire?

At this point I think there is no use in discussion with you. You refuse to see what is in front of you. I can understand if you do not want to accept
the connections around Barack, but your arguments are not an acceptable debate in my opinion.

Where is this communism?

I will be nice and ask you if you know about Fabian socialism. Fabian socialism is socialism implemented in increments. It has been happening for
decades at least since FDR, so this is not just about Barack. It is slow and methodical, requiring long term deployment and a lot of deception of the
people, as it is well known that communism brought about immediately is not accepted by the people and as you say, the communist gulag system in
Russia came apart at the seams because communism does not really work, but this does not mean tha tthere are no communists left in the world. That is
a mistake to imagine such a thing.

to make everyone believe you, well, it doesn't work. This election was proof of it, thankfully.

No, this election is proof that people can be fooled any day of the week by people slick enough to package socialism in something people want, like
gay marriage and free contraceptives, and pretending it is all about tolerance.

If I called you a vampire, but you don't drink blood or live in a castle, does that make you a vampire?

At this point I think there is no use in discussion with you. You refuse to see what is in front of you. I can understand if you do not want to accept
the connections around Barack, but your arguments are not an acceptable debate in my opinion.

That is what you are doing... You keep repeating things you make up and expect me to accept them
as the truth.

Your form of debate is wailing away on a false premise and them acting hurt when people
call you out on your tactics.

Where is this communism?

I will be nice and ask you if you know about Fabian socialism. Fabian socialism is socialism implemented in increments. It has been happening for
decades at least since FDR, so this is not just about Barack. It is slow and methodical, requiring long term deployment and a lot of deception of the
people, as it is well known that communism brought about immediately is not accepted by the people and as you say, the communist gulag system in
Russia came apart at the seams because communism does not really work, but this does not mean tha tthere are no communists left in the world. That is
a mistake to imagine such a thing.

edit on 9-11-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

OK, fine,

so in 80 YEARS since FDR's inauguration (yesterday 80 years ago) where is all this communism?

can you please list things you have gotten from the government in the last month so we can
examine your claims?

Lets apply some logic and you can kick my ass with all your proof of communism

to make everyone believe you, well, it doesn't work. This election was proof of it, thankfully.

No, this election is proof that people can be fooled any day of the week by people slick enough to package socialism in something people want, like
gay marriage and free contraceptives, and pretending it is all about tolerance.

edit on 9-11-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-11-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason
given)

It is about tolerance... you think it is fun arguing with illogical xenophobe and bigots?

Well, I'll tell you it is exhausting

I am waiting for your list of socialist/communist/marxist derive benefits you have received in recent times.

You claim is is so pervasive, yet it is undetectable, explain that for me please.

Again, let's talk about Fabian socialism. We have a mixed economy, so this is how the DSA and the Democrats get away with saying that we are not a
socialist country. But parts of our economy are socialized. We have private corporations, but they are heavily regulated so free enterprise is not
entirely espoused. Then the Democratic socialists say, see the corporations are evil. We have a lot of redistribution of income already embedded
within our society since the New Deal of FDR, and with Social Security and Medicare. Now we have Obamacare but without single payer, but they want
single payer and this Obamacare is the interim between private healthcare and centralized healthcare. So then the Democrats say oh Obamacare is not
socialist because private corporations still exist and because there is no single payer setup. People who want single payer will say that Big Pharma
wrote the legislation, but this really is the next step in implementing a socialist state.

It is exhausting talking with liberals who keep saying it is about tolerance when it is clearly not. Tolerance is used as a way to guilt people into
accepting things. For instance if an illegal sneaks into the country and gets access to resources supplied by the state and the taxpayers have to pick
up the tab, the liberals will say that the person who does not wish to pay for such services is intolerant and xenophobic.
If a Catholic does not wish to support the killing of the unborn fetus, the liberal says oh you are just intolerant and hate women.

You see how this works?

I am waiting for your list of socialist/communist/marxist derive benefits you have received in recent times.

I think you misunderstand how Marxism operates and what it entails. It is not just about receiving benefits. Only a certain sector of people get "free
stuff" right now. I do not happen to be receiving "free stuff". Even Social Security is based on what one is forced to pay into the system in the
first place. This brings us to another definition of Marxism. That is the supremacy of the State. If I must pay into this SS system involuntarily,
that means it is a State sponsored centralized program which I must participate in involuntarily.
Let's talk about private property. Karl Marx stated in the Communist Manifesto that all private property should be abolished. So that is one key
definition of Marxism/communism/socialism.

So then people try to argue that in the socialist state, the people (Marx's Proletariat) own the means of production. In reality, when people own
something communally and which the State controls it is not private property but State property. In other words, under the Marxist socialist state
there is no private property.
Marx declared that the State would eventually wither away leaving the people to run and own things, but that did not happen in Communist Russia did
it? The entire system collapsed. What did the people own communally? They were worked to death in the gulags and the rest had their lives and
professions controlled by the Politburo.

Is that what you want? It is what you will get if we continue the path that Barack and the Democrats are pushing on us.

You claim is is so pervasive, yet it is undetectable, explain that for me please.

Again, let's talk about Fabian socialism. We have a mixed economy, so this is how the DSA and the Democrats get away with saying that we are not a
socialist country. But parts of our economy are socialized. We have private corporations, but they are heavily regulated so free enterprise is not
entirely espoused. Then the Democratic socialists say, see the corporations are evil. We have a lot of redistribution of income already embedded
within our society since the New Deal of FDR, and with Social Security and Medicare. Now we have Obamacare but without single payer, but they want
single payer and this Obamacare is the interim between private healthcare and centralized healthcare. So then the Democrats say oh Obamacare is not
socialist because private corporations still exist and because there is no single payer setup. People who want single payer will say that Big Pharma
wrote the legislation, but this really is the next step in implementing a socialist state.

It sounds like you do not even know what socialism is.

A socialist would never advocate for a system that keeps rampant profiteering in place.

What you are explaining is called political compromise

FYI how much of your income is redistributed into the hands of private corporations each month?

Give me a figure in percentage

(I know you will not because it will make your argument look foolish)

Lastly, I don't personally know a single lefty who would prefer a socialist system to a mixed system
like we have. Seriously secret socialism, going on I guess.

This is a silly argument people here like to use. Just because you say it doesn't make it so. Sounds to me like you don't know what it is and you will
not bother to find out.

I have in fact given you classic definitions of communism and Marxism, as well as Fabian Socialism and yet you are telling me I do not know what it
is. Have you even read the Communist Manifesto? Do you know what the terms Bourgeois and Proletariat mean?

Please study first before going off telling people they don't know things.

The Fabian Society is a British socialist organization whose purpose is to advance the principles of democratic socialism via gradualist and
reformist, rather than revolutionary, means.[1][2] It is best known for its initial ground-breaking work beginning late in the 19th century and
continuing up to World War I. The society laid many of the foundations of the Labour Party and subsequently affected the policies of states emerging
from the decolonisation of the British Empire, especially India.

Fabians believed in gradual nationalization of the economy through manipulation of the democratic process. Breaking away from the violent
revolutionary socialists of their day, they thought that the only real way to effect "fundamental change" and "social justice" was through a mass
movement of the working classes presided over by intellectual and cultural elites

www.forbes.com...
I have given you classic textbook definitions and I know I am right about Fabianism.

It is exhausting talking with liberals who keep saying it is about tolerance when it is clearly not.

It is not because you say it is not, how and the hell do you know what motivates me?

You believe in Jesus, I believe in pursuing his lessons in practice through tolerance.

Tolerance is used as a way to guilt people into accepting things. For instance if an illegal sneaks into the country and gets access to resources
supplied by the state and the taxpayers have to pick up the tab, the liberals will say that the person who does not wish to pay for such services is
intolerant and xenophobic.

That is you projecting your conservative bend on it...

Xenopobia of conservatives would better be described as the thinking that all Muslims are terrorists,
or that all Mexicans are on Welfare.

My tolerance, that is very real, informs me that I cannot possibly know everything about every
Mexican or a Muslim in the world.

If a Catholic does not wish to support the killing of the unborn fetus, the liberal says oh you are just intolerant and hate women.

You see how this works?

That is a caveman like over simplification of it, again applying your conservative lack of depth to the
concept.

If a Catholic does not want to have an abortion, nobody is forcing that person to have an
abortion.

ok I'm done talking with you. I have had my say and you are just putting your own bizarre spin on it.

Whatever.

There is an old saying, "Do not cast your pearls before swine".

"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink"

I leave you now to simmer in your own juices.

Sounds good to me

When this economy is working fine in two years and Obama is hailed as a hero
(for doing something that will happen as a matter of nature), it will only be because
you and your mates have worked so hard at lowering expectations.

I am simmering in four more years

You guys are gonna eat it exactly because you cannot stop yourselves from entering into
the rightwing bubble of fantasy.

Once reality eclipses the fairy tale your have concocted, you are gonna have no argument
or legitimacy.

This is a silly argument people here like to use. Just because you say it doesn't make it so. Sounds to me like you don't know what it is and you will
not bother to find out.

I have in fact given you classic definitions of communism and Marxism, as well as Fabian Socialism and yet you are telling me I do not know what it
is. Have you even read the Communist Manifesto? Do you know what the terms Bourgeois and Proletariat mean?

Please study first before going off telling people they don't know things.

The Fabian Society is a British socialist organization whose purpose is to advance the principles of democratic socialism via gradualist and
reformist, rather than revolutionary, means.[1][2] It is best known for its initial ground-breaking work beginning late in the 19th century and
continuing up to World War I. The society laid many of the foundations of the Labour Party and subsequently affected the policies of states emerging
from the decolonisation of the British Empire, especially India.

Fabians believed in gradual nationalization of the economy through manipulation of the democratic process. Breaking away from the violent
revolutionary socialists of their day, they thought that the only real way to effect "fundamental change" and "social justice" was through a mass
movement of the working classes presided over by intellectual and cultural elites

www.forbes.com...
I have given you classic textbook definitions and I know I am right about Fabianism.

edit on 9-11-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-11-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason
given)

I see you didn't answer my several requests to list the socialistically derived things you have received this month. Exactly, because you are playing
make believe and have no evidence of ACTUAL socialism, you
are talking about that secret stuff that is undetectable to the human senses

If a Catholic does not want to have an abortion, nobody is forcing that person to have an

You fail to understand what this discussion was about and the ramifications. It started with the Obamacare MANDATE forcing Catholic institutions to
provide contraception in their insurance coverage. This in itself is part of the centralized bureaucratic abomination of Obamacare that parades around
as giving people better healthcare.

If you think this is just my opinion, you better start looking up facts.

President Obama has suffered another setback in court. A federal judge in Colorado recently ruled that the Department of Health and Human Services
mandate that all insurance policies cover contraceptive and abortifacient drugs placed an illegal burden on freedom of religion.

Now that you understand this was about the federal government forcing private religious institutions to provide certain services which goes against
religious freedom, let us explore why the Catholic Church opposes it.

The answer is in contraceptions such as the Pill as being abortifacients, which means that substances in The Pill can cause a fertilized egg to abort.
This is why Catholics do not support mandated coverage of such contraceptives.

I agree, now lets keep the country divided by using the media and lets call each other names because that is the mature thing to do. I would
really like to say more but just reading the posts says it all, we will never meet in the middle. I see as a country in dire need of real leadership
and neither Romney or Obama have it,

I see you didn't answer my several requests to list the socialistically derived things you have received this month. Exactly, because you are playing
make believe and have no evidence of ACTUALLY socialism, you

You don't know what you are talking about and this is just fluff because you are not listening to me and you don't want to know what is going on. You
have no viable arguments to counter my points.

I am getting tired of this obtuse stuff from you.

I have tried my best to explain things but you are unwilling to understand. I can't make you understand. So I am going to leave you with thanks for
helping me to show that people who support a popular President don't always know what it is they are really supporting.

Ironically, I don't dislike Rachel. In fact she seems a likeable person. I don't have to agree with her positions though. It's funny how she rants
about how Romney ran in Massachusetts as a Progressive but how he ran as conservative in the Presidential election, which appears to be true, but
Democrats have painted Romney as an extreme right winger.

But can you really blame any man for saying they believe in a woman's right to abortion? Men are afraid to cross women on this issue. Would you blame
any of them? Wanna cross a radical feminist?

I see you didn't answer my several requests to list the socialistically derived things you have received this month. Exactly, because you are playing
make believe and have no evidence of ACTUALLY socialism, you

You don't know what you are talking about and this is just fluff because you are not listening to me and you don't want to know what is going on.
You have no viable arguments to counter my points.

I am getting tired of this obtuse stuff from you.

I have tried my best to explain things but you are unwilling to understand. I can't make you understand. So I am going to leave you with thanks for
helping me to show that people who support a popular President don't always know what it is they are really supporting.

I am asking you to list evidence from the real world of socialism that YOU experience, if you are claiming
socialism is rampant in America, why can't you fulfill my request?

You can't fill my request because you have no real evidence besides hearsay and speculation.

In a court of law, you would FAIL!

F-

Thats the truth, you cannot be angry because I am asking you for proof in the society you say is
being over thrown.

Maybe you do not have enough logic to understand what the implication of that mean, I'd like
to think you are smarter than that I guess.

If you claimed there was a fire and I asked you to show me smoke or a burnt building would you
find that unreasonable?

I think Miss. Maddow spoke well in this clip. To be honest, there was a time, very long ago, in which I was a libertarian. I actually had been
convinced that no hold barred capitalism was a good thing.

Then I was reminded of reality. Materialism reminded me that no matter how much I attempted to will certain conditions to be true; it will simply not
be true.

I think the conservative movement can be a serious part of the American conversation but they are going to have to start to live in reality.

It is clear that American society is going in the exact opposite of the conservative movement.

So, I would say to the conservative movement: It is time to live in reality. You are letting the wrong people lead you. The thinking that the ultra
rich will help give you liberty is folly. Don`t worry, I am aware that liberals are also lead by the rich. You have no reason to be angry with me
because I am not a conservative nor a liberal. I am a socialist and I am asking all of you in the conservative movement to please live in reality.

Please help your fellow Americans develop a path which will benefit everyone. The old idea of `Every man/women for themselves` is not going to work
anymore. Trust me when I say we need you. Yet, as long as you offer up ideas which are not inline with the actual material conditions, the majority of
Americans are not going to listen to you.

The country broke center left. Not center right. Draw your inferences since it is important that you do and go forward trying to deal with it like a
mature adult. That's all I am asking. I am not sitting here saying I told you so to all the vicious rants on ATS saying Obama would lose and why he
would. You all were wrong. Try to be grown up about it and take it like an American.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.